Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Pasquale A. Bonanni, No. B-119716.
Pasquale A. Bonnani, appellant, for himself.
Charles G. Hasson, Assistant Attorney General, with him Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, and Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for appellee.
Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. President Judge Bowman and Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer, Wilkinson, Jr., Mencer, Rogers and Blatt. Opinion by Judge Kramer. Dissenting Opinion by Judge Blatt.
[ 22 Pa. Commw. Page 516]
This is an appeal by Pasquale A. Bonnani from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, dated November 19, 1973, which affirmed an order of a referee reducing Bonnani's weekly unemployment compensation benefits to $12.00.
[ 22 Pa. Commw. Page 517]
Bonnani retired on June 29, 1973, from the federal civil service. He receives a monthly pension of $518, the equivalent of $119 per week. The referee relied upon section 404(d)(iii) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Act), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 804(d) (iii) (Supp. 1975-1976), which reads, in relevant part:
"(d) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section each eligible employe who is unemployed with respect to any week ending subsequent to the first day of July, one thousand nine hundred seventy-one shall be paid with respect to such week, compensation in an amount equal to his weekly benefit rate less the total of . . . (iii) that part of a retirement pension or annuity, if any, received by him under a private pension plan to which a base-year employer of such employe has contributed which is in excess of forty dollars ($40) per week."
Applying this formula to Bonnani's pension figures, the referee correctly computed Bonnani's benefits at $12 per week.
Bonnani argues that a deduction of pension benefits from unemployment compensation benefits is not required until a claimant has recovered his contributions to the pension fund. This argument has been rejected many times. See Goldsmith v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 15 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 57, 324 A.2d 892 (1974); Etter v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 12 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 642, 316 A.2d 659 (1974); Ettelson v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 12 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 617, 316 A.2d 661 (1974); and Dalesio v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 10 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 343, 310 A.2d 92 (1973).
Bonnani refers to the fact that the Internal Revenue Service considers the ...